Despite DNA Evidence Establishing Paternity, Court Finds Reasonable Doubt on Consent and Overturns Conviction for Serious Charges Including Rape and Threats
In a significant judgment delivered on September 3, 2026, the Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the prosecutrix challenging the acquittal of the accused, Anoop, in a high-profile sexual assault case. The appeal arose out of a trial court's judgment dated October 7, 2024, which acquitted the accused of multiple charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 328 (administering intoxicating substance), 376(2)(n) (rape), 377 (unnatural sexual offences), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 509 (insult to modesty).
The case involved serious allegations by the prosecutrix, a married woman whose husband was disabled and unable to father a biological child, leading to the adoption of a child in 2014. The prosecutrix accused the respondent of repeatedly engaging in sexual relations against her will from 2017 onwards, including an incident where she was allegedly administered an intoxicant. The prosecutrix became pregnant and gave birth to a child in 2019, with DNA tests later confirming the accused as the biological father.
The trial court had acquitted the accused after finding material discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecutrix's testimony, particularly concerning the administration of intoxicants, the circumstances of the first alleged assault, the conduct of the prosecutrix and her husband, and the delay in lodging the FIR in 2021 - nearly two years after the child's birth. The court also noted a lack of corroborative evidence for some of the more serious allegations such as unnatural sexual acts and threats via nude photographs or videos.
On appeal, the prosecutrix contended that her testimony was credible and consistent and that the DNA evidence was conclusive proof of the accused's guilt. However, the Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's reasoning, emphasizing that while the sole testimony of a prosecutrix can suffice for conviction, it must be reliable, consistent, and inspire confidence beyond reasonable doubt. The Court highlighted that the DNA evidence alone proved sexual intercourse but did not establish absence of consent, which remained a crucial issue.
The judgment reiterated established legal principles that an appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless it is perverse, manifestly illegal, or based on a misappreciation of evidence. The Court found the trial court's conclusions to be a reasonably possible view on the evidence and thus declined to overturn the acquittal.
This ruling underscores the judicial requirement for rigorous scrutiny of testimonies in sexual offence cases, especially where allegations are contested, and highlights the nuanced distinction courts must maintain between proof of sexual intercourse and proof of sexual offence under law.
Bottom Line:
Acquittal in sexual assault cases - Sole testimony of prosecutrix, while sufficient for conviction, must inspire confidence and be free from material inconsistencies and contradictions.
Statutory provision(s):
Indian Penal Code Sections 328, 376(2)(n), 377, 506, 509; Indian Evidence Act Section 114A; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 419; Code of Criminal Procedure Sections 164, 313, 437A
KXXXXX v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2972579
